Please Note You do not need to refer to statute or repeat the facts of the problem. Also, remember that this is an advice on evidence not the answe

Please Note You do not need to refer to statute or repeat the facts of the problem. Also, remember that this is an advice on evidence not the answer to a problem question.

Re- Mr Ramzi SAYED

Our client, Mr Ramzi Sayed owns and operates a motor car repair business in Tempe, NSW, called Flashcars. The business has not been incorporated, and is therefore not a company. He employs two mechanics.

In the garage he uses a large, hydraulic Readilift hoist to lift cars to allow access under the cars. There is a one metre pit beneath the hoist. The hoist is essential to the business. Without it, Mr Sayed would not be able to make repairs. check for problems under cars or perform registration checks.

On or about 20 May 2022, the hoist stopped working it would move neither up nor down. Our client rang Readilift Pty Ltd and explained the problem. Readilift promised to send a repairman within 24 hours. The following day, 21 May at approx. 10.30am, Mr Fred Dofrogg arrived from Redilift and spent three hours examining and fiddling with the hoist. He told Mr Sayed that the problem had been fixed. When asked what the problem was. Mr Dofrogg replied that there had been a loose wire in the control box. Because the hoist was no longer under warranty, Mr Sayed paid $800.00 for the service call.

At approx. 4.30 pm, our client asked one of the mechanics to drive a car onto the wheel tracks of the hoist. The mechanic then got out of the car and pushed the button to raise the hoist. Mr Sayed jumped into the pit to begin the inspection. Suddenly, there was a loud grating sound and the hoist and car collapsed back onto the ground. Mr Sayed was trapped under the car. The car was rapidly towed off the tracks and Mr Sayed was assisted from the pit. Luckily, he had sustained minor injuries viz a minor bruise on his left forearm, a minor bruise on his upper back and a cut on his left cheek. An ambulance took him to the RPAH, where he was examined and five stitches used to close the cut on his face. He was then sent home with a couple of Panadol.

The following day Mr Sayed called Readilift, spoke to the manager, Ms Paris McDonald, and described the accident. Ms McDonald denied all responsibility for the failure of the hoist and blamed the incident upon Mr Sayeds carelessness. Mr Sayed then rang another car hoist supplier, Superlift Co, and explained what had happened. They immediately sent an engineer to examine the hoist. The engineer discovered that someone had disconnected the wiring controls for the braking system, probably Mr Dofrogg. He further told Mr Sayed that it was a basic error that no properly qualified hoist mechanic would have made. Mr Sayed asked him to prepare a report and to fix the hoist. The repairs cost another $650.00. He has not yet received the report.

Meanwhile, Mr Sayed had to turn away six customers who wanted him to look at their cars.

Also, our client was extremely traumatised by the accident and has since suffered from-

headachesnauseasleeplessnessnightmaresnight sweats and

panic attacks.

Could counsel please advise whether our client

1.has a claim against Readilift Pty Ltd;

2.has a claim against Fred Dofrogg;

3.if so, what damages can he claim, if any, and

4.whether he can claim for his physical and psychological injuries?

Could counsel also advise as to what further evidence our client needs to produce.